The only indication we need to know about the ethics of OpenAI is the fact that it's a private for-profit company that claims the name "OpenAI", where "open" has very clear meaning in its sphere of relevance (technology, computing, and software).
The one idea I don't like surrounding 10x engineers is the rhetoric by startups or companies around hiring is "we're only looking for rockstars and 10x engineers", which naturally denigrates the majority of (1x) engineers. This launches a broader discussion of whether success in business manifests by scaling up or scaling out, and I tend to be a proponent of Locke than Hobbes.
So the controversial nature comes from the implication that most of the workforce (1x engineers like myself) are worthless and not worth hiring, and also the hubris of thinking a 1x company can hire and retain a/only 10x engineers (these same startups/companies usually offer a 1x or less compensation package). If you think I'm wrong, then fire 90% of your engineers and see where that gets you; that would be an interesting result if productivity increased!
I think this is separate from mere jealousy or denial; 10x engineers definitely do exist and I look up to them for inspiration and example.
This is a stock grant that vests over 10 years, so averaged out it's 21 million a years. Saying that his salary is 212 million is straight misinformation
The logical construction of this piece is poorly formulated.
The title is “why does x happen”.
The content is:
I believe foo.
Evidence behind why author believes foo.
Here is an arbitrary list of 6 behavioral responses to foo: [a b c d e x].
X happens which is a bad thing.
There is no critical analysis or evidence substantiating the 6 responses, nor how/why response x happens. In other words, there’s no intellectual rigor behind the title’s claim, nor do I have any inclination to believe the author’s claim as true after reading it.
This is a bit off topic, but does the "professional sports" analogy really work for tech (e.g. software/hardware) organizations? In sports the game is always the same, and while there may be different play styles or systems the fundamentals are pretty much the same.
In tech orgs, a system (potentially composed of dozens of service) can often outgrow their team, especially when there's high attrition and turnover (perhaps because you view each individual software engineer as a highly expendable/fungible "pro sports player").
Seems like a breeding ground for entropy, and compositions of systems built on lost history, chaos, and confusion.
If there was sufficient profit for it, I'd quit my job and take an iq test and score awfully low on it because I always do poorly on something the first time I try it (SAT test, tech interviews, etc.). Then, I'd study for iq tests, take ~1,000 practice ones, and score in the top 10%. The iq advocates would be flabbergasted! I managed to increase my iq by several standard deviations: what a revolutionary, miraculous result!
Then, I would probably create a startup that would offer the same service to the children of wealthy families who wanted their child to be intellectually gifted. With an annual tuition of $10,000 over 10 years, their child could be catapulted for life into the top levels of life outcomes and live as part of the elite class in America. Enrolling a mere 1,000 students (200 in East bay, 200 south bay, 200 SF, 400 in Northeast) would net a revenue of 100 million dollars.
Musical training helps to delineate and connect different contexts together in real time. It also requires precise hand-eye coordination and fine motor skills executed perfectly (or as my instructor would say "as closely to perfect as you can: perfect does not exist").
There's probably many domains it overlaps and assists with (not to mention the general philosophies that translate to other domains like creativity, continuity of motion, practice/discipline/feedback/improvement -- e.g. "music is the tool to express life" Herbie Hancock). Though naturally, excellence in one domain does not grant the knowledge necessary to be a master in another
nit: jazz is the melodic minor (raised 6th as well). Such a beautiful sound; and the modes allow you to get the altered scale (7th mode of melodic minor) which sounds good(?) over the dominant
Without verification you don't know if any of them are marking $2k+